1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

3 x 30Gb OCZ Vertex Raid 0 Array?

Discussion in 'Storage' started by mcloughj, Mar 4, 2009.

  1. mcloughj

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2005
    Messages:
    311 (0.09/day)
    Thanks Received:
    68
    Location:
    Dublin, Ireland
    Thinking of putting together a 90gb raid array with 3 x 30Gb ocz vertex drives. In total it would cost about 400 euro... Would you do it? I sometimes worry about my sanity when it comes to computer gear....
     
  2. Jizzler

    Jizzler

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2007
    Messages:
    3,627 (1.23/day)
    Thanks Received:
    721
    Location:
    Geneva, FL, USA
    Yes, yes I would.
     
  3. CyberDruid

    CyberDruid New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2007
    Messages:
    2,888 (1.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,100
    Location:
    On top of a mountain
    Take a look at the G Skill Titan. The dual controller cures stuttering pretty much.
     
    thebeephaha says thanks.
  4. waxking1 New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2008
    Messages:
    63 (0.02/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9
    I think I would just get the 120GB Vertex with 64mb cache. I haven't heard any reports of any stuttering in the Vertex series. Also wouldn't you need to purchase a controller card for the 3 way raid?
     
  5. LAN_deRf_HA

    LAN_deRf_HA

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2008
    Messages:
    4,591 (1.70/day)
    Thanks Received:
    970
    The Vertex is the best SSD out now, doesn't use that junk controller that still stutters even with the dual crap and firmware updates. If you're going to get a high perf ssd for your desktop only get a vertex. I don't even trust intel now with that fragmentation stuff. Not that it matters, the vertex is faster and cheaper than the intel too.
     
  6. Mussels

    Mussels Moderprator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    43,551 (10.93/day)
    Thanks Received:
    10,718
    Location:
    Australalalalalaia.
    depends on your needs. if you're just a gamer, get one large one.

    be kinda useless if your windows goes from 3 seconds boot time to 2.95, or your games go from 5 seconds to 4 seconds... you wont get a huge boost from multiple drives, like you would from a mechanical to one SSD.
     
  7. Hayder_Master

    Hayder_Master

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2008
    Messages:
    5,190 (1.93/day)
    Thanks Received:
    651
    Location:
    IRAQ-Baghdad
    really only this difference , so for me i chose large one ssd
     
  8. sethk New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2007
    Messages:
    63 (0.02/day)
    Thanks Received:
    5
    Over a certain speed, maybe the benefits are less noticeable - depends on the user. I think speed benefits are still noticeable. Watch this video for the concept taken to extremes: http://www.engadget.com/2009/03/09/24-samsung-ssds-get-strung-together-for-supercomputer-fun/
    If you prefer raw number, read some of the recent reviews running Vertex drives in RAID - the performance scaling is very impressive.

    In fact SSD drives show a much better (closer to linear) scaling than mechanical drives in RAID because of the very low latency, leading to much less blocking (no need to perform head aligns). So I would not agree in general with the assumption that SSD drives will show less of a boost in RAID 0 compared to mechanical drives in RAID.

    Running multiple drives in RAID is a pain and expensive, but the performance benefits for the hardcore are undeniable, compared to a single larger drive.
     
    Last edited: Mar 29, 2009
  9. LittleLizard

    LittleLizard

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2008
    Messages:
    3,777 (1.53/day)
    Thanks Received:
    575
    Location:
    Latin America, Uruguay
    the best use for a ssd i ever see was to use it for a ps3 :D
     
  10. renozi

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2005
    Messages:
    255 (0.07/day)
    Thanks Received:
    19
    Location:
    Glendale, Arizona
    I'm about to get 2 30GB vertex for raid 0, so yes, I'd do it in a second!
     
  11. cheapskate1988 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Messages:
    5 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    I am about to do the exact same thing! What kind of raid controller are you going to use? I am not all that familiar with raid, but would like to know if I could get away with using some onboard controller on a socket 775 motherboard. I am building the system from scratch, so if you could recommend a motherboard that would be able to realize the performance gains of the two ssds in raid 0, it would be much appreciated. If you think I have to get a raid controller, any ideas on which one and how much cache? I might just bail out on the concept if I have to get a raid controller over 200 dollars.

    If worse comes to worse, I might just get a 30 GB vertex as a system disk, but I don't know what kind of benefit I should expect from that.
     
  12. renozi

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2005
    Messages:
    255 (0.07/day)
    Thanks Received:
    19
    Location:
    Glendale, Arizona
    yea i'm just using the onboard intel chipset ich9r controller. I think we can get away with using the onboard controller for up to 500-600MB/s. I don't know what motherboard you have so I can't say if yours has a raid controller or not but if it does then there's no real need to go out and buy a raid card. I mean you'll probably gain 5-10MB/s on the onboard controller, if that. Hope that helps, I'll post once I get my vertexes...it's starting to get itchy waiting for them!:banghead:
     
    cheapskate1988 says thanks.
  13. Studabaker

    Studabaker New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2009
    Messages:
    1,116 (0.47/day)
    Thanks Received:
    73
    Location:
    Somewhere in the underground
    It's been my idea to RAID0 two of the 32Gigger (I was thinking Patriot) SSD's for a WHILE now, so yes, YES I WOULD! :)
     
  14. renozi

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2005
    Messages:
    255 (0.07/day)
    Thanks Received:
    19
    Location:
    Glendale, Arizona
    cheapskate1988, by any chance were you born in '88?
     
  15. Wile E

    Wile E Power User

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    24,324 (7.46/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,778
  16. renozi

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2005
    Messages:
    255 (0.07/day)
    Thanks Received:
    19
    Location:
    Glendale, Arizona
    Me too, but I don't have $3500 :/
     
  17. cheapskate1988 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Messages:
    5 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    You guessed it. 1988 was a great year to enter this God-forsaken place we call reality. It's been a good time so far.

    I think I have got some of the final specifications for this computer I'm going to be building over the summer. Gotta save a bit more, but I still have some concerns. Principally, I am still not sure if the OCZ Vertex 30 GB, which is an MLC-based drive, is going to last long enough if I put the page file on it. The SLC products are just way too pricy right now, but I would want this drive to last for a least five years until the prices come down for an SLC replacement.

    Do you think it would be reasonable to put my page file on the the RAID Disk? My plan would be to put XP, the page file, major applications and the occasional game on the 58 GB partition that the RAID 0 would create. I would then have a traditional hard disk as the main storage drive. Would having applications and the page file on the same SSD partition slow the apps down and defeat the purpose?

    Bunch of questions, I know, but I am very eager to hear your results. I am going to be using a GIGABYTE GA-EG45M-UD2H LGA 775 Intel G45 HDMI Micro ATX with an ICH10R south bridge. It'll have an E8500 Wolfdale, 4 GB of Mushkin DDR2 1066, and my current HD 4670 1 GB GDDR3.

    I am not a heavy gamer, but enjoy the occasional round of Fallout 3, Call of Duty 2 or any of the Total War games. My main goal is to have a workhorse computer because I cannot stand waiting on technology. Hopefully we won't have to anymore.
     
  18. cheapskate1988 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Messages:
    5 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Holy hell. At that point you might as well spring for the SLC drives. Intel and Samsung have some beasts that are in that price range that are even faster and will prove to be more reliable. That is going to be one kick-ass computer either way.
     
  19. renozi

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2005
    Messages:
    255 (0.07/day)
    Thanks Received:
    19
    Location:
    Glendale, Arizona
    sweet another '88 child!

    Since I have 8gb of ram I chose not to have a page file at all. It's pretty much useless to me. And the last time I put my page file on another raid 0 volume I had, one of the drives had an error and it cost me a clean install and some loss of files. So with my experience of that, never again will I have page file or if needed, put a page file on a raid volume. But then again that's just my luck, you might have a better experience. who knows?

    The problem with page file on the SSD is that you want to extend the life of your SSD as long as you can and that means lowering random writes as much as possible. Page file would mean increased random writes to the SSD, and over at the OCZ forums one of the features they suggest you turn off if you can is pagefile, along with prefetch and superfetch, and drive indexing.

    Hope that helps, should be getting my vertexes today or tomorrow.
     
  20. cheapskate1988 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Messages:
    5 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    I guess you are right. 4 GB is probably sufficient to disable the page file anyway. Especially in XP. It cant be doing all that much if XP doesn't really occupy all that much physical memory anyway.

    Now there will be no moving parts, but better yet, no moving virtual memory constantly filling up and dumping itself.
     
  21. renozi

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2005
    Messages:
    255 (0.07/day)
    Thanks Received:
    19
    Location:
    Glendale, Arizona
  22. Wile E

    Wile E Power User

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    24,324 (7.46/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,778
    Disabling the pagefile is a bad idea, regardless of the amount of ram you have. Some programs require it to run properly, regardless.
     
    cheapskate1988 says thanks.
  23. DaMulta

    DaMulta My stars went supernova

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2006
    Messages:
    16,135 (4.86/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,459
    Location:
    Oklahoma T-Town
    yep
     
    cheapskate1988 says thanks.
  24. cheapskate1988 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Messages:
    5 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Good to know. I know there has always been some debate about pagefiles. Any recommendations then on where to place the page file? Could its being on an MLC limit the lifespan to under five years? It would be a little disappointing if the performance gains were lowered by having to put it on a conventional disk.
     
  25. Wile E

    Wile E Power User

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    24,324 (7.46/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,778
    With the super low seek times, I'd try to leave it on the SSD first. I would compare putting it on a separate drive tho, just in case.
     

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page